Re: Worth it to Upgrade from Fujifilm X to GFX Series for Landscapes?
gdanmitchell wrote: BeatX replied: …imatest software and MTF50 function to determine resolution both sensor and lenses.
Your response is a non sequitur and doesn’t answer the question.
Further, it is a question about the supposed “facts” that you say you value more than mere “opinions.” Yet you are tossing around values like “10% increase in resolution” that you can’t explain or define.
When your undefined (and apparently undefinable) “facts” contradict substantial real-world empirical observations, your conclusions based on thos supposed “facts” are most certainly subject to question.
You asked a question and I answered it.
You didn't ask me to explain the answer.
Although I know exactly what you are getting at, because the explanation of the answer is in the link I pasted.
You just want to clearly prove to me and others, that I don't know what I'm talking about.
Well, ok, so be it - if it satisfies you... I don't have enough knowledge to understand all the technical intricacies related to the measurement methodology of optical devices and sensors.
This does not change the fact that I do not need to know all these technical details to understand simple conclusions from these measurements and experiments.
If smarter people than me measured the X-Trans V and X-Trans IV sensor, and wrote in the summary that the real resolution gain between them is 10%, then there is nothing to discuss further.
If you do not have hard evidence that the measurements from optyczne.pl are wrong, you should assume that they are valid until someone discredits them.
This is how science works.
Anyway, here in this video someone did a similar experiment with Fuji sensors comparison, where the conclusions coincide exactly with my observations and measurements from optyczne.pl
I strongly encourage You to watch this video.
You will be surprised, as I was.
?si=gk2T4xAMLO5wrAjU
And when it comes to so-called empirical measurements (based on your senses), they are very inaccurate because human senses are downright primitive among the mammalian world.
They are very easy to fool (it is called illusion)
In addition, the signals sent from your sense organs to the brain, which interprets these signals and thus creates your reality, are often distorted by your prejudices, beliefs, faith, or under the influence of someone else's opinion (or the placebo effect).
This is why I don't fully trust my senses... but that's just me.
I trust measurements and experiences to find out the real state of affairs.
Simple experiment: one of these files is the original from the X-Trans V matrix, the other is processed (downscaled, upscaled)
Please let me know which file is which:
1)
2)
Here, after a very thorough analysis, you will probably find tiny differences (and at the same time compare these differences with your empirical observations and measurement results from optyczne.pl)
I would like to point out that I used one of the sharpest UWA lenses for Fuji X: Viltrox 13/1.4 stopped down to its peak performance @f/5.6
If X-Trans V sensors provide such a gain in the fine detail like everybody hype (compared to previous sensor generations), such destructive photo processing as downscaling/upscaling should deprive original file of all details that X-Trans V sensor supposedly records
Meanwhile, as everyone can see, there is practically no loss of detail.
Hence the conclusion that these details were never recorded into the original file (probably due to lens optical limitations - I think so)
And here's a curiosity, optical illusions:
?si=nGlw5u8e5o9h8ptz
This is how much You can trust your eyes (meaning how easily you can be fooled by your senses, even though you think you see and hear everything clearly)
Apr 09, 2024 at 09:08 PM
Previous versions of BeatX's message #16520356 « Worth it to Upgrade from Fujifilm X to GFX Series for Landscapes? »
(meaning how easily you can be fooled by your senses, even though you think you see and hear everything clearly)